Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 113189 - Joint Mtng MOING DATE : 12/19/89 ITEM:—A-2 MINUTES - JOINT MEETING MEVI AQE"M _ ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION -1��9�. ITEM/ A? Tuesday, November 21, 1989 7 :00 p.m. (CITY COUNCIL) Atascadero Administration Building Approved as read 12/19/89 The joint meeting of the Atascadero City Council and Planning Commission was called to order at 7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Dexter followed by the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL Present: Councilpersons Mackey, Shiers, Borgeson, Lilley (arrived 8 : 15 p.m. ) , Mayor Dexter and Planning Commissioners Lopez-Balbontin, Luna, Highland, Waage, Brasher, Hanauer, and Chairperson Lochridge Staff Present: Ray Windsor, City Manager; Henry Engen, Community Development Director; Gary Sims, Senior Civil Engineer, Steve DeCamp, City Planner; Pat Shepphard, Administrative Secretary I Mayor Dexter announced that Councilperson Lilley would be late for the meeting. Chairperson Lochridge stated no action would be taken on the Consent Calendar as the minutes were not ready for consideration at this time. He then handed the gavel to Mayor Dexter. PUBLIC COMMENT Gail Mudgett, Ardilla Road resident, inquired why the agenda was not posted in the library and asked if this meeting was legal . Mayor Dexter clarified that this meeting is not a public hearing but a study session between the Council and Commission. Noticing the meeting in the newspaper was not required in this case. Councilperson Borgeson apologized for the inadequate noticing adding that policy direction has been for staff to notice meetings in the library and newspaper as well as other public posting places . Discussion followed. Steve LaSalle, area resident, referenced the previous General Plan quadrant meetings in which there was public input. He felt that any meeting which reflects the General Plan Update should be a public meeting. Dolores Berry, 6955 Balboa Road, read the attached statement asking for assurances that the General Plan provisions remain unchanged. 0 PAGE TWO • • Dorothy McNeil stated that Atascadero' s average growth rate is 3 .81% and expressed concern with the development of 10, 000 acres in western Atascadero stating that there are no lands for parks, fire station, etc . and the tax payers will end up footing the bill since the developers will not. Mrs . McNeil addressed the cumulative impacts of development on the area voicing concern of piecemeal development. An E . I .R. for this area versus one lot development should be required. Bill Barnes, area resident, disputed Mrs . McNeil ' s statement relative to developing 10,000 acres stating his property that is currently being developed is only 370 acres . John McNeil voiced that Mr. Barnes ' development is small but there are other developments involved with this general area. He commented on abuses of the General Plan which is occurring and CEQA requirements which are not being adhered to. Mrs . Barnes questioned references to the propriety of Mr. Barnes ' activities . At this point, Mayor Dexter closed the Public Comment portion of the meeting. B. STUDY SESSION 1. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE STATUS (verbal) a. Land Use Element b. Open Space Element C. Conservation Element d. Circulation element e. Housing Element f. Noise Element g. Safety ( including seismic) Element h. Parks and Recreation Element Henry Engen reported on the General Plan update status and spoke about the state mandated elements . The General Plan Subcommittee has been going over sketch plans of maps and text. No new annexations are proposed except for public lands (Heilmann Park, Paloma Park, etc . ) . There are no increases in residential densities . A restructuring of El Camino Real and Morro Road is being worked on to make these areas more identifiable and more viable. Mr. Engen stated he hopes that the draft plan will be forwarded to the subcommittee in December prior to taking it to public hearing. With regard to the Housing Element, an update is required every five years . The State took issue with Atascadero' s large lots. PAGE THREE • • Mr. Engen stated that a consultant is in the process of being selected to develop a noise element for the county and its individual cities which needs updating for clearer policies, etc. Requests for proposals will be obtained for a consultant to work with the City and County on a joint basis in developing a viable safety ( including seismic) element. Council and Commission questions and discussion followed. There was discussion on making the General Plan draft available prior to public hearing. Commissioner Highland commented that we are encountering the same problem as in the 70' s with getting consistency between the land use element and the housing element as the state is pushing for smaller lots . Discussion followed relative to affordable housing alternatives to apartments such as condominiums, mobile homes, planned unit developments, feasibility of 10, 000 square foot lots in multi-family zoning, etc . 8 : 15 p.m. - Councilperson Lilley is now present. The Commission and Council also discussed planned unit developments with regard to the need for guidelines, open space areas for play area, as well as the regulatory opportunities and amenities that can be required for a p.u.d. as opposed to apartment housing. Councilperson Borgeson referenced an earlier report submitted by Eric Michielssen which gave a comprehensive description of what exactly a p.u.d. concept is . Wendy Stockton (representing City Attorney Art Montandan) suggested this issue be placed on a future agenda. Public Comment: Dolores Berry asked if drainage is going to be included within the Safety Element. Councilperson Borgeson referenced the Government Code relative to the Safety Element and how it ties in with drainage. Discussion followed. 2 . OTHER PLANNING STUDIES a. Interim Growth Management Committee b. Downtown Master Plan (verbal) C. Fire Services Master Plan (verbal) d. Fiscal Planning Model PAGE FOUR Mr. Engen reported on the Interim Growth Management Committee and referenced a resolution which was submitted to the County. He noted that the City has requested input to the County regarding this issue. Quarterly reports will be prepared to monitor growth in Atascadero. Councilmember Shiers (member of the interim growth management committee) , commented on the growth issues adding that the best protection against growth is in the General Plan and its policies . Commissioner Lilley (also a committee member) added that growth needs to be monitored and provided an update on the committee' s findings . Commissioner Hanauer referenced the County statistics contained in Mr. Engen' s staff report stating there has been a steady incline in growth since 1985 . Mr. Engen added that approximately 140 single family residences are constructed each year. Discussion continued. With regard to the Downtown Master Plan, Mr. Engen presented a report on the status of this plan noting that the consultant should have the final report completed some time in January. In addressing the Fire Services Master Plan, Mr. Engen explained that a meeting had been Meld earlier today to select a proposal . Work on this is expected to be completed in March, 1990 . Ray Windsor referenced memorandums contained in the agenda packet which explain the need for a fiscal planning model which would tie together with the General Plan and address issues that have been raised this evening. Discussion followed. 3. GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE ISSUES a. CEQA - 10% slopes, new roads, etc . b. Drainage master plan Mr. Engen explained the state-mandated requirement for requiring precise plans (environmental review) for grading on slopes over 10% and the effect this requirement will have. in discussing the master road agreement, Mr. Engen stated this agreement was first utilized before city incorporation and added that steps are being taken to assure that these roads are constructed in compliance with CEQA guidelines . Mr. Engen commented that the development review committee process has been reinstituted wherein representatives from the various affected city departments review proposed developments . FIVE PAGE 0 • Councilperson Borgeson commented on the EIR and CEQA process and cautioned that care be taken that a Negative Declaration determination is justified. There was further discussion relative to the Dovica tract map which was approved in 1982 and how subsequent adoption of the City' s zoning ordinance and CEQA guidelines would now have a significant effect on development standards and environmental guidelines for that subdivision today. Discussion also followed involving bonding versus putting in the required improvements for a subdivision. Past practice allowing guarantees has been shifted to a policy of normally requiring installation of improvements . Discussion also centered around building on slopes over 30'-k, problems that the performance standards encounter in determining lot size criteria, the fact that lots which have not been developed are becoming steeper and steeper. Erin Michielssen stated that bonding for improvements can be an effective way to insure that the conditions are satisfied. It is up to the City to call in the bonds if an applicant does not comply. In response to question, Mr. Engen stated that an EIR had been prepared in 1979 for the Long Valley Ranch area which focused on geology and seismic considerations . Commissioner Luna asked what type of environmental review the General Plan update will undergo. Councilperson Lilley stated that a draft General Plan is needed in order to discuss whether an EIR is warranted. Discussion continued. Joan O' Keefe stated that the cumulative effects of lot splits need to be specifically addressed in the Genral Plan. Commissioner Brasher concurred stating she is uncomfortable with voting on individual lot splits . This was further discussion concerning the appropriateness of a focused EIR for the General Plan. Gary Sims, Senior Civil Engineer, provided an overview of drainage problems . A master plan would be too broad and not feasible; there are a few subdrainage areas which would merit a drainage plan but those areas have not been the ones that have created this present controversy. Swales are there to protect the roads; policy is to have the drainage run under the streets . Most of the drainage problems are contained in the urban core; urban storm drain systems are very expensive and in many areas of town it will not be economically feasible. The property owners should be aware of potential drainage problems when they purchase property. PAGE SIX Commissioner Highland provided a historic background on the drainage plan that was needed. The General Plan calls for urban drainage within the Urban Service Line and not in the suburban residential areas . Mr. Sims added that the only feasible plan may be that of maintenance. The Public works Department has drainage concerns and are constantly trying to keep the City' s drainage ways clean. People fill up the swales thereby clogging City culverts . James Berry commented on Mr. Sims ' comments and showed an aerial photo which depicts where the drainage from over 300 acres drains down to his property. The citizens deserve better than this and he would be thankful for any problems which can be alleviated. Mayor Dexter remarked that the City will work with the Berrys to try and resolve their concerns . Councilwoman Borgeson stated that problems are being fixed on a piecemeal basis . The City Council can set parameters on what can be spent. A comprehensive plan is needed with priorities being set . These problems will not go away unless a comprehensive plan can be designed to identify currant and future problems . Mr. Engen stated that the land use element is the first draft of the General Plan update which will be reviewed. Co1mIssloner Luna voiced that the rules have not been played by and a focused EIR is needed. Councilperson Shiers added that because procedures have not be followed in the past, problems are now occurring. Councilperson Lilley commented on the rural lifestyle the citizens of Atascadero desire; responsibility needs to be taken. Sometimes people have built too close to a drainage swale. Limits need to be set as to whattheCity does . Commissioner Hanauer suggested that sections of plans could be integrated into a comprehensive plan. Fred Frank stated he did not move next to the Dovica subdivision and added that Public Works is headed in the right direction in trying to mitigate the drainage problems . John Madrid said he would provide the City staff with some positive proposals . Mayor Dexter expressed his appreciation to the Council and Commission for this study session. PAGE SEVEN • The meeting of the Planning Commission and City Council adjourned at 10 : 37 . MINUTES RECORDED BY: Patricia Shep ard, dministra ive Secretary MINUTES APPROVED BY: qr� —00000 Henr ngen, Coimunity De Upment Director